Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

Most of the resistance to this title seems to be more from anime/manga fans who are afraid it will taint the industry than from any religious group. Ask the average person on the street and they probably would have no idea what you are talking about. As much as fandom loves anime/manga, I would guess that the average American just doesn't care.

Troubling. Now I begin to wonder how much dropping the title (especially so close to the first volume's release) is/would costing/cost the company, as well as if they would sell the license to another North American manga distributor (which hasn't been scared away by "controversy," and I use quotes because most of the public controversy has been over the title's delays and not its actual content).

bleh.... when a very small but loud minority dictate to the rest what they can look at, it be troubling times as usual. I'm going to let SSE know that ANN doesn't speak for even a significant part of the fandom.

Honestly, that thread over there was so full of random and meaningless arguments that I couldn't read the whole thing. The thing is, Kodomo no Jikan is a niche title. No one (well, very few people) is going to go to B&N or Borders, see this shrink-wrapped manga, read the summary, buy it, read it, then be disgusted and raise a ruckus (and by ruckus I mean actual action, not making rude comments on internet forums and blog sites). I want to walk into a business, purposefully choose my purchase, and buy it for my entertainment. That's being an informed consumer. If someone buys the manga and then proceeds to carry out some sick wish that includes a child, that person had problems before they read the manga. The fact that he/she purchased such a thing is a mere tangent in the overall problem.

I'm rather fed up at all these references to the words "loli" and "pedophilia" that people are stamping onto this title. Who cares? It's entertainment, and this is a free nation. If you are offended by something which can easily be completely ignored, choose to ignore it.

Ah well... at least for the moment, SevenSeas has taken down all their KnJ material and the forum while they consider. There are some posts of inquiry and support in the Talkback section of their forum.

It would be disappointing if they folded their cards based on the rants of a few people who haven't read the books. But it is rather simple - they have to sell enough books to cover their costs and make a minimum profit. If the larger chains won't carry it, they have to make the calculation.
Negima was shrinkwrapped for the lamest of reasons so I can see a chain just playing it safe.

EDIT: Its looking a *little* more bleak. ICv2 just reported that SevenSeas is dropping it. I'm putting a LOT of ?????? question marks on the report though (frankly it sounded a bit gossipy the way it was written). I'm going to wait til SevenSeas says something on their website before I'd call it confirmed.
... I wonder if they're considering a much more limited print run and sell it strictly online.

Day Two of the "orwellian erasure" of KnJ
No official response from SevenSeas. This has piqued a broad spectrum of my "jeffersonian/ACLU/witchburning" flags so I'll be keeping an eye on it.

There were some peripheral remarks made on Aoi Notes by the gomanga forum admin but they were a bit cryptic:

Quote:

Tuesday was one seriously long day around the Seven Seas offices. Between editing Tetragrammaton Labyrinth Vol. 2 and dealing with this Kodomo no Jikan business, it's really no wonder my nerves are shot right now. I know there are probably some people reading today's Aoi Notes hoping for some insight, but it's really not my place to comment on Nymphet's cancellation.

From a personal standpoint, I do want to say that my team and I put a lot of effort into making sure our release of that first volume of Kodomo no Jikan was the best it could be. We even sent it back to be completely relettered at one point because we weren't totally satisfied with how it looked. So for me, it is sad knowing that the book won't find a home on my Seven Seas bookshelf, but there are very valid reasons for why.

I would like to ask that people remain civil and to please stop blaming Anime News Network. They're not at fault here.

1) It says there were valid reasons but none were given.
2) The word "cancellation" is used but it doesn't say if it's permament nor does it say whether they're dropping the license.
3) It says ANN is not to blame.... but since that site was a prime instigator in the affair and they were purposely distorting information, some rationale is necessary NOT to put blame. I do not buy the statement "Mistakes were made" as a blame diffusor.

More information as it arrives but really, SevenSeas needs to say something. Frankly I'd be disappointed but would quite understand if their vendors all took off like terrified rabbits because of any "lolita" whiff. At least I'd know to loathe the vendors for being completely inconsistent in their policy as they sell all sorts of other significantly more troublesome things

I'd go see what ANN is saying but I hate giving them any opportunity to increase their ad-views.

I understand that the "decision is final" but may I suggest that -- if you want to -- everyone just write a polite (as in, non-flame) e-mail to 7 Seas asking for Kojikan to be reconsidered? I just did, myself. If there's enough support for it, it will show the higher management that there are profits to be made from publication after all...

My whole beef with this issue is that Seven Seas bent to pressure from the moralizing crowd... which really isn't a crowd, just Zac Bertschy + his fanboys. So what if the manga portrays children sexually? They're drawings, there's a market for it; it would've sold; it's LEGAL.

Not wanting to distribute this title for the sake of manga's good reputation in the U.S. is a futile and an attempt of disillusioned people. Manga also serves to pedophile/lolicon crowds, and that's a fact even the cancellation of the local U.S. distribution won't change. If this fact disgusts anyone personally, they're free to leave the hobby, just don't try to spit on it like the people you've tried to educate in the past what manga/anime is all about.

Its also just a pretty interesting story about morals and the psychology of people. And I'll be the first to point out I'm unamused by the lead character's stuffed bear inferences which pander to that subset. But I was also quite disturbed by the rape scene in the remake of Cape Fear -- didn't mean it wasn't a fascinating story of hate and revenge.

So what if the manga portrays children sexually? They're drawings, there's a market for it; it would've sold; it's LEGAL.

I keep being told that it's legal, but then I keep running into the United States Code Title 18:

Quote:

Title 18 of the United States Code governs child pornography. See Chapter 110, Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children. 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines "Child pornography" as:

"any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where -

(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct . . ."

and as for now I'm still puzzled as for if it is or is not legal in the US. And just to make sure I'm completely clear, I'm refering to manga. I do not under and circumstances condone actual children.

I think they key word in that argument would be "implied." Granted, some of the images I've seen are quite direct.

I'd just like all the naysayers to take a step back. Look at the ages of a majority of female manga characters. 13-20 years old, roundabout. Would this series be any less troubling for these people if the girls were older? Think about it.

(11) the term “indistinguishable” used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.

This is my first post here and I'm basking in the irony of my choice of name and this subject.

There's a part of me that says the Nazi book burners strike again. But there's a line to be drawn. Manga is a commercial art and for it to be successful there has to be commercial appeal without major public outcry that could hurt sales. FUD can be seen as public outcry. Phonies and "moralists" (can't lose the quotes) like FUD.

Other manga series came close to this line:

Spoiler for Cited Examples:

Chobits: Chii, while described in the story as appearing 16 years old, is frequently drawn nude and/or imitating pornographic magazines and videos. She even participates in a webcam peep show. I personally know of one B&N that puled this from the shelf.

Mahoromatic: 'nuff said. Also pulled at the same B&N.

Saikano: The main characters, Chise and Shuji, Highschool students, are depicted having sex with each other and various other characters in the story. Including one depiction where a jrHigh aged Shuji is seduced by a student teacher. The plastic wrap helped this one stay on the shelf.

Negima, Tsukuyomi, NHK Ni Yokoso, Yubisaki Milk Tea...

I, for one, think I would find the story hilarious. But that's just my twisted style. It's easy to predict that this title will ever garner enough support to be profitable. Without the controversy, it would have probably received a resounding "meh" by the critics.

My suggestion: Give the series the unimportance it deserves. If the story is so desirable; learn Japanese and buy the book over there. Most people in customs are not so judgmental.

This is just gut-twisting stupid; droping a title just because a few people are displeased. Moreover, people who are not even the best informed about the content or the landscape of manga and anime in general (those who still don't want to accept hentai as another genre or are in denial about the positive influence of eroge in anime) and see porn in anything that seems at least a little off their norms.

Seven Seas should have made a more extensive research on the audience this was intented for. I think the "online buy only" idea was good enough; it is a very particular title as it is and those who want it, would have been able to find it.

Anyway, I wanted to say the Church Lady won this one, but this feels more like a victory for the crazy homeless guy outside the church.

Granted that the general defination "Lolita" today derived from the context of the novel.

Would another choice of title have evaded the fate of the book as of today ? Perhaps "The Time Of Love For The Moe Girl" (Literal translation of the Taiwan Chinese edition) might have been more accepted.

Lolita has been riled as a literary classic. But KnJ, a tamed spiritual successor, has been shoted down before it's release.

Well, true, but Lolita was banned for a while before it was finally published. So really a support for your statement, "the more things change, the more they stay the same"

For the interested, Lolita was published first in 1955 in English...in Paris! Nobody would touch the manuscript except for the Parisian publisher of erotic novels. Copies of the green-bound book were contraband and seized at customs inspections. It was later published in New York, in 1958 by Putnam.